AHC: Racially liberal, pro-Women's opportunities, Sexually Conservative USA

Nightingale

Nightingale

With a POD no earlier than 1950, have both the Democrats and Republicans stay sexually conservative but liberal on race and women's opportunities (wages, jobs, education), immigration and drug decriminalization (but still illegal), but stay conservative in issues such as gay rights and abortion.

Bonus points if Democrats lose the culturally conservative South post-1964 but still remain socially conservative.
 
The Byronic Hero

The Byronic Hero

Nightingale said:
With a POD no earlier than 1950, have both the Democrats and Republicans stay sexually conservative but liberal on race and women's opportunities (wages, jobs, education), immigration and drug decriminalization (but still illegal), but stay conservative in issues such as gay rights and abortion.

Bonus points if Democrats lose the culturally conservative South post-1964 but still remain socially conservative.
Click to expand...
So...you want a sexual moderate? There is no way I can see to cherry pick from liberal and conservative mindsets in regards to sex. How can you be sexually conservative but believe in women's rights or abortion? Those are never going to gel. There's a reason women returned to the home in the conservative 50s. If you want women's rights you challenge the conservative view that women should raise children and abortion is a grenade that threatens family creation and, to conservatives, responsibility. There is no way I can see to be both a conservative and a liberal.

The drugs issue can technically happen if you prevent the backlash against Mexicans which led to marijuana criminalization (and set precedent for drug criminalization) or if you have an earlier Nixon administration whose war on drugs is focused on prevention and programs (via national healthcare, plus) rather than cracking down in response to Watergate (gotta divert attention). Have Dewey elected in 1940 and create national healthcare (he wanted to in OTL). JFK dies in WWII. The Dems win in '48 leading to them dealing with Korea likely leading to the same outcome with MacArthur's nuclear plans. MacArthur runs in '52 forcing Eisenhower to run as in OTL. With no JFK, Nixon wins in '60 and pushes civil rights regaining the black vote for the party of Lincoln and the Dems struggling to regain them, the latter going so far to the left in that regard it alienates their conservative southern base.
 

overoceans

Inferus wrote::

How can you be sexually conservative but believe in women's rights or abortion?

Well, at least in the anglosphere, there was at one time a pretty large overlap between feminism and the prohibitionist and eugenics movements. I'm pretty sure that most of the adherents of the latter two were in favour of conservative notions of sexual restraint, even if the feminists among them might have sought to eliminate the demonization of women as the temptresses leading men astray.

Still something of a hero in Canada

I can almost guarantee that Ms. Murphy would not have been in favour of so-called hook-up culture or even heavy petting on the first date. (Granted, she probably was not in favour of abortion either, and would probably have viewed its prevention as one more benefit to sterilization.)

But yeah, it might be hard to have this style of feminism continue into the mid-20th Century and beyond.
 
MichaelWest

MichaelWest

You need the moderate wing, in effect the old Progressive strain of the GOP to remain firmly in control, the Democratic big tent needs to fold and revert to its traditional hold in South. This GOP should be generally socially conservative but more progressive on civil rights generally, the Democrats likely fall into more populist swings, steering socially conservative and less civil rights minded. The GOP will be economically Liberal minded while the Democrats might indulge in popular social welfare to garner votes thus not fully Liberal in a classical sense, they play more to conservative minded GOP voters in the Midwest but might lose the progressive West and industrial North if Republicans stay in favor of unions. Civil rights should get you the women's rights and breakdown of Jim Crow, neither party is going to embrace sexual liberalization. Your bigger challenge is the birth control pill, it revolutionized sex for women by taking pregnancy out of the equation. But does that mean all the social morays are dead? One might argue that a stronger feminist argument in civil rights argues for sexual "equality" but one can see how it may never argue for sexual "freedom." Take away the turmoil of Vietnam, have the prosperity bubble last longer to shift more Americans to staid suburban life and middle-class notions of good behavior and this might be how America behaves. Doable but I think it is better to reach back before 1950 to seed the trends you need.
 

Carl Schwamberger

I'm really doubting you can get to sexually conservative from the political side. The sexual revolution had its roots in the growth of urban centers, women with independent incomes, and cheap birth control. All those things date to the latter 19th Century in the US. What people call 'Swinging' these days in the various flavors, homosexuality and bisexulality, ect.. were practiced by a segment. They were regarded differently than post 1950, labeled differently, and publicized very little. The latter is probably the largest difference as folks started talking about sexuality in the US publicly in the latter half or the 20th Century and putting that discussion into print.

Suppresing or avoiding that public dialogue may be possible, but the modern equivalent of the Hellfire Club or La Ronde was well established in US urban culture by the mid 20th Century.
 

FillyofDelphi

Banned
Inferus said:
Sexually conservative and liberal? I tend to support the term moderate since it is not an extreme one way or the other. How can someone be extreme towards both ends of the spectrum without being bipolar?
Click to expand...

Easy; tie Liberal notions of "Rights/Privlages" to a Conservative notion of "Obligations/Responsibilities" and the idea of the American Dream (IE You work hard, study, practice traditional WASP thrift, invest wisely ect. and you to can move from labor to self-employement/stable upward career path/small business owner. Social mobility.) and apply it to women equally as much as men. In doing so, shaming the "women of loose morale" would be a huge PR victory for that wing of the movement, especially if it comes down to actions and attitude (I.E casting birth control as smart family planning when combined with being selective in who one sleep's with as opposed to an excuse to flaunt it. Practicing what they preach, ect) and like the temperance movement promote the idea of feminine vulnerability (of responsable women) to "vice", even if its a socially tolerated one. A man ought to 'take responsability" when he knocks up a girl, right? But if he should also get honored and respected if he waits until marriage and protected from vicious rumors since her EARNED his reputation. Give that same idea to Good Christian Ladies
 

Raferty

You need the black social conservatism in the Democratic Party to assert itself. In survey questions, black Americans routinely give quite socially conservative answers on abortion, homosexuality, and gender roles. However, politically, that gets pushed behind the Democratic Party's liberal agenda on sexual issues. Perhaps Black Democratic Politicians gain a lot more power quickly and overturn the party's views on social issues as a result.
 

fasquardon

Inferus said:
So...you want a sexual moderate? There is no way I can see to cherry pick from liberal and conservative mindsets in regards to sex. How can you be sexually conservative but believe in women's rights or abortion? Those are never going to gel. There's a reason women returned to the home in the conservative 50s. If you want women's rights you challenge the conservative view that women should raise children and abortion is a grenade that threatens family creation and, to conservatives, responsibility. There is no way I can see to be both a conservative and a liberal.
Click to expand...

The OP did specifically say that abortion would be one of the areas the Democratic Party remained against.

Nightingale said:
stay conservative in issues such as gay rights and abortion.
Click to expand...

And there's really no reason why someone who is liberal in one sense should be liberal in other senses. People often are liberal in the ways that suit them and conservative in the ways that suit them. Also, I don't think there is anything inevitable about the political coalitions that pushed the Democratic Party to be relatively pro-abortion and pro-gay rights. For example, if the party had wooed Christian groups more strongly or not chosen to court the professional class so strongly.

fasquardon
 
Nightingale

Nightingale

For those saying the OP isn't possible, the said OP actually exists as the Faith and Family Left portion of the American population. The only thing you have to do is to make sure that this becomes mainstream in the United States. And others who say that Blacks (and Latinos as well) have some pretty sexually conservative folks are right. It's just that the national Democratic Party is sexually liberal.
 
Last edited:

Colonel Zoidberg

So it needs to check three boxes.

Pro-race equality: one possibility is to avert the Wilson presidency and maintain an integrated military and federal government, thereby de-legitimizing segregation on a national scale. It wouldn't hurt if the Black Sox scandal were averted as well, thereby eliminating the need for a hardline segregationist such as Landis to take power in baseball. With Americans seeing black and white soldiers and athletes working together, it legitimizes racial equality much sooner and makes civil rights in every area but the most hardened South a foregone conclusion post-WWII. And sure there will be tension and backlash, but much more progress will be made.

Pro-female empowerment: more woman-power needed during the wars. Have America enter WWI sooner and push more women into factory jobs and military support. Eventually the need for female soldiers will happen, and women will be allowed expanded roles in WWII. With women in expanded roles during both wars, expect more people to recognize women's abilities and push for more equality.

Sexually conservative - earlier AIDS should do the trick here. With AIDS on the loose, feminist groups become much more sexually conservative, as does mainstream America.
 
Neoteros

Neoteros

Colonel Zoidberg said:
So it needs to check three boxes.

Pro-race equality: one possibility is to avert the Wilson presidency and maintain an integrated military and federal government, thereby de-legitimizing segregation on a national scale. It wouldn't hurt if the Black Sox scandal were averted as well, thereby eliminating the need for a hardline segregationist such as Landis to take power in baseball. With Americans seeing black and white soldiers and athletes working together, it legitimizes racial equality much sooner and makes civil rights in every area but the most hardened South a foregone conclusion post-WWII. And sure there will be tension and backlash, but much more progress will be made.

Pro-female empowerment: more woman-power needed during the wars. Have America enter WWI sooner and push more women into factory jobs and military support. Eventually the need for female soldiers will happen, and women will be allowed expanded roles in WWII. With women in expanded roles during both wars, expect more people to recognize women's abilities and push for more equality.

Sexually conservative - earlier AIDS should do the trick here. With AIDS on the loose, feminist groups become much more sexually conservative, as does mainstream America.
Click to expand...

This is happening right now, actually; on Tumblr, the more radical a feminist is, the more likely it is that their views on sex will resemble those of a very conservative, religious man. Maybe in 20 or 30 years some of them will enter politics.
 
Nightingale

Nightingale

Neoteros said:
This is happening right now, actually; on Tumblr, the more radical a feminist is, the more likely it is that their views on sex will resemble those of a very conservative, religious man. Maybe in 20 or 30 years some of them will enter politics.
Click to expand...

You mean a revival of the mainstreaming of sexual conservatism in the US within a generation?
 

Colonel Zoidberg

Inferus said:
How bad is this second world war to need female soldiers? The Soviets had them but that was because of the monumental casualties they suffered.
Click to expand...

I was more thinking of female support staff behind the lines, and I was thinking the first war more so than the second. Basically the US gets involved in WWI from the start and it turns into a nightmarish slog for them. The War evens out on both sides, and patriotic fervor and an opportunity to profit make it stay in the war long enough for females to be more involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top